城市DIY飞地?: 2000-2019年赫尔辛基音乐场景的“另类”文化空间
Pysyvaisosoite
http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:hulib-202006253444| Julkaisun nimi: | 城市DIY飞地?: 2000-2019年赫尔辛基音乐场景的“另类”文化空间 |
| Toissijainen nimi: | Omaehtoisen kulttuurin kehtoja吗?: 2000-luvun helsinkiläisten musiikkiskenejen "vaihtoehtoiset" kulttuuritilat |
| Tekija: | Hanninen, Juho |
| Muu tekija: | Helsingin yliopisto, Matemaattis-luonnontieteellinen tiedekunta bob体育下注安卓版赫尔辛基大学理学院 赫尔辛弗斯大学，Matematisk-naturvetenskapliga fakulteten |
| Julkaisija: | Helsingin yliopisto |
| Paivays: | 2020 |
| Kieli: | 英格 |
| URI: | http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:hulib-202006253444 http://hdl.handle.net/10138/316960 |
| 塔索(taso) Opinnaytteen: | 箴gradu -tutkielmat |
| Koulutusohjelma: | Kaupunkitutkimuksen ja sunnittelun maisteriohjelma 城市研究与规划硕士课程 Magisterprogrammet i urbana study och planering |
| Opintosuunta: | USP人民 USP人民 USP人民 |
| Oppiaine: | 没有一个 |
| Tiivistelma: | 这篇论文的主题是替代的，非正式的，非商业性的文化空间，使用空间的场景，和个体场景参与者。该研究的框架是2000-2019年的赫尔辛基。本研究结合了亚文化研究、传统和城市主义的相关理论探讨。该论文的关键概念是“场景”、“亚文化”的文化定义、“另类文化空间”、“DIY文化”(“自己做”)和“飞地”。论文展示了赫尔辛基的“DIY景观”，由相互联系的演员——场景参与者组成，他们是一个网络的一部分，围绕着在特定的城市基础设施——城市赫尔辛基——制作、表演和促进音乐，在这个网络中，另类文化空间为场景创造了物理的“中心”。这些数据是通过口述历史回忆和定性调查相结合的方式在网上收集的。这些数据是赫尔辛基城市博物馆和芬兰音乐档案馆于2019年秋季合作收集的。该数据由70个单独的回答组成。数据是通过定性研究和口述历史的认识论来处理的，因此被认为包括“事实”信息和举报人的主观解释，他们的经验。在实践层面，主要通过定性内容分析(QCA)进行分析，并利用地理信息系统(GIS)进行分析。 The study aims to explicate a widely recognized but poorly known cultural phenomenon. The study’s key results are as follows. Four types of alternative cultural spaces have existed: dedicated buildings, rooms, outdoor venues, and even a ship. All of the study’s 34 spaces have hosted live music events and a variety of other cultural, political, and social activities. The spaces have been acquired for use by renting, squatting, and asking permission, and in two cases are owned by the facilitator. With some exceptions, they are located in the fringe areas of Helsinki’s city center, have a relatively short lifespan (maximum of five years in a set location) and share ‘aesthetics of necessity’ that roots meager or non-existent funding and the use of subcultural symbols and art. The spaces follow certain ‘DIY operating principles’ that aim to create an encouraging and inclusive atmosphere for DIY participation. The spaces, and their users, have faced a variety of challenges, setbacks, and problems. These are rooted in funding, the deficits of the buildings and their facilities, and to other citizens, the police, and the City of Helsinki. The City’s role emerges from the data as ambivalent—a constrainer and enabler. According to the responder’s experience, the City does not have a uniform policy towards the use of vacant urban space, and DIY culture overall is not recognized. For the scenes, the alternative cultural spaces function as platforms where cherish—often ‘marginal’—music and subcultures. Some of the participants connect political and societal ideals to the spaces and DIY activities. DIY activities emerged as—sometimes self-purposefully—social and communal by their nature. In the spaces between scene participants take place socio-cultural ‘cross-fertilization,’ which sometimes leads to new organizational groups and even scenes forming. These might relocate their practices elsewhere, and thus DIY culture spreads to new locations in the urban infrastructure. For the individual scene participants, crossing with the scene represents an important part of finding a social reference group. Some of the responders described going through a ‘DIY phase,’ which is a several yearlong period in their youth when life orientations and identity are intensively connected to DIY culture. The meaningfulness of scene participation lasts to later life, even if the participant’s active years are foregone. For some, the skills and knowledge acquired in the scene creates a basis for a more professional career in cultural production. As the reasons for the diminish or end of the DIY participation are given the closure of an alternative cultural space focal for the participant, challenges in activities, and major life events. In the discussion, the thesis suggests the concept of ‘urban DIY enclaves’ in the toolboxes of urban planners and designers. The DIY enclaves differentiate from the broader urban landscape by their condition, aesthetics, political messages, and subcultural symbols. Socially they have been constructed to advance DIY culture and cherish the creative lifestyle associated with it. The concept is suggested as a device for acknowledging the existence of DIY culture; in other words, its need for space, and its participants’ eagerness to participate in the construction of the urban and cultural landscape. |
| Avainsanat: | DIY 文化空间 亚文化 城市空间 人种音乐学 口述历史 |
Tiedostot
Latausmaara yhteensa:Ladataan……
| Tiedosto (t) | 可可 | Formaatti | Nayta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hanninen_Juho_maisteritutkielma_2020.pdf | 6.863 mb | Avaa tiedosto |